On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 12:36:38PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> IMHO, the best solution here would be a protocol message to change the
> session user. The pooler could use that repeatedly on the same
> session, but refuse to propagate such messages from client
> connections.
But this requires
On Sat, Dec 30, 2023 at 10:16:59AM -0600, Eric Hanson wrote:
> What do you think of adding a NO RESET option to the SET ROLE command?
I've wanted this forever. Consider using this to implement user
authentication mechanisms in user-defined SQL functions that use `SET
ROLE` with `NO RESET` to
On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 10:14:16AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> It seems like a pretty significant savings no matter what. Suppose the
> backup_manifest file is 2GB, and instead of creating a 2GB buffer, you
> create an 1MB buffer and feed the data to the parser in 1MB chunks.
> Well, that saves
On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 01:15:03PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > The fact that there are multiple types of normalization and multiple
> > notions of equality doesn't make this easier.
And then there's text that isn't normalized to any of them.
> NFC is really the only one that makes sense.
Yes.
On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 05:07:40PM +0200, Daniel Verite wrote:
> > * Add a per-database option to enforce only storing assigned unicode
> > code points.
>
> There's a problem in the fact that the set of assigned code points is
> expanding with every Unicode release, which happens about every
On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 01:16:22PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> There's a very popular commercial database where, or so I have been
> led to believe, any byte sequence at all is accepted when you try to
> put values into the database. [...]
In other circles we call this "just-use-8".
ZFS, for
On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 02:37:06PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > Sure, because TEXT in PG doesn't have codeset+encoding as part of it --
> > it's whatever the database's encoding is. Collation can and should be a
> > porperty of a column, since for Unicode it wouldn't be reasonable to
> > make
On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 02:17:32PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 1:38 PM Nico Williams wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 01:33:06PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 3:15 PM Nico Williams
> > > wrote:
> > > &g
On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 01:33:06PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 3:15 PM Nico Williams wrote:
> > Text+encoding can be just like bytea with a one- or two-byte prefix
> > indicating what codeset+encoding it's in. That'd be how to encode
> > such te
On Thu, Oct 05, 2023 at 03:49:37PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Nico Williams writes:
> > Text+encoding can be just like bytea with a one- or two-byte prefix
> > indicating what codeset+encoding it's in. That'd be how to encode
> > such text values on the wire, though on d
On Thu, Oct 05, 2023 at 07:31:54AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> [...] On the other hand, to do that in PostgreSQL, we'd need to
> propagate the character set/encoding information into all of the
> places that currently get the typmod and collation, and that is not a
> small number of places. It's a
On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 04:01:26PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-10-04 at 16:15 -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> > Better that than TEXT blobs w/ the encoding given by the `CREATE
> > DATABASE` or `initdb` default!
>
> From an engineering perspective, yes, per-c
On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 05:32:50PM -0400, Chapman Flack wrote:
> Well, for what reason does anybody run PG now with the encoding set
> to anything besides UTF-8? I don't really have my finger on that pulse.
Because they still have databases that didn't use UTF-8 10 or 20 years
ago that they
On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 01:38:15PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-10-04 at 14:02 -0400, Chapman Flack wrote:
> > The SQL standard would have me able to:
> >
> > [...]
> > _UTF8'Hello, world!' and _LATIN1'Hello, world!'
>
> Is there a use case for that? UTF-8 is able to encode any
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 03:47:10PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> The idea is to have a new data type, say "UTEXT", that normalizes the
> input so that it can have an improved notion of equality while still
> using memcmp().
A UTEXT type would be helpful for specifying that the text must be
Unicode
On Tue, Oct 03, 2023 at 03:34:44PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-10-03 at 15:15 -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> > Ugh, My client is not displying 'a' correctly
>
> Ugh. Is that an argument in favor of normalization or against?
Heheh, well, it's an argument in favor o
On Tue, Oct 03, 2023 at 12:15:10PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Mon, 2023-10-02 at 15:27 -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> > I think you misunderstand Unicode normalization and equivalence.
> > There is no standard Unicode `normalize()` that would cause the
> > above equality
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 03:47:10PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> One of the frustrations with using the "C" locale (or any deterministic
> locale) is that the following returns false:
>
> SELECT 'á' = 'á'; -- false
>
> because those are the unicode sequences U&'\0061\0301' and U&'\00E1',
>
Couldn't this be handled by having a new permission on FUNCTIONs
("CALL"?) to distinguish EXECUTE?
This would have to be made backwards-compatible, possibly by
automatically granting CALL ON ALL FUNCTIONS to public at schema create
time and/or PG upgrade time, which the schema owner could then
On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 01:15:58AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Nico Williams writes:
> > On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 04:34:50PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> So now I'm about ready to propose that we just *always* use
> >> snprintf.c, and forget all of the related configure pro
On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 04:34:50PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> So now I'm about ready to propose that we just *always* use
> snprintf.c, and forget all of the related configure probing.
Yes.
> This'd have some advantages, notably that we'd get the
> useful_strerror() behavior in frontend as well as
There's also clang on Windows, which VS apparently supports. With clang
on Windows PG could even make use of GCC/Clang C extensions :^)
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 11:50:24PM +, Nasby, Jim wrote:
> On Aug 14, 2018, at 4:01 PM, Nico Williams wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 03:00:55PM +, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> The more I think about it, the more I think having a way to set a
> >
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 03:00:55PM +, Robert Haas wrote:
> The more I think about it, the more I think having a way to set a
> lexically-scoped search path is probably the answer. [...]
Yes please!
This is what I want. Evaluate the search_path at function definition
time, and record code
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 03:18:32PM -0400, Garick Hamlin wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:24:32PM +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> > I read the rational of the host/hostaddr artificial mapping. I cannot say
> > I'm thrilled with the result: I do not really see a setting where avoiding a
> > DNS
On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 11:16:23AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Well, the issue is that new kinds of switches introduce new potential
> for bugs. In the case of -Wl,-R..., I'm not even sure that you can
> write that more than once per link, so absorbing one from xml2-config
> might well break things
[Quoting out of order.]
On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 11:16:23AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>
> I'm not, personally, eager to do that work for a requirement which
> somehow hasn't surfaced on any other platform, nor on any previous
> NetBSD release. I think NetBSD is way out in left
On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 01:12:09PM -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> I'm willing to write a patch after lunch. In ./configure.in this:
>
> for pgac_option in `$XML2_CONFIG --libs`; do
> case $pgac_option in
> -L*) LDFLAGS="$LDFLAGS $pgac_option";
On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 10:47:04AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Isaac Morland writes:
> > While I'm asking, does anybody know why this isn't the default, especially
> > for SECURITY DEFINER functions?
>
> It might fix some subset of security issues, but I think that changing
> the default behavior
On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 12:47:05PM -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> -- (3) "SET search_path" with today's code.
> --
> -- Security and reliability considerations are the same as (2). Today, this
> -- reduces performance by suppressing optimizations like inlining.
Out of curiosity, why does this
On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 01:18:26PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> In a moment of idle curiosity, I tried to build PG --with-libxml
> on NetBSD-current (well, mostly current, from May or so).
> The configure script blew up, complaining that it couldn't execute
> a test program. Investigation showed that
On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 02:34:07PM -0600, Bear Giles wrote:
> Some regulatory standards require all UII, even all PII, information be
> encrypted within the database, not just on encrypted media. That's to
> reduce exposure even if someone gets access to a live server, e.g., via SQL
> Injection.
On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 01:15:38PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> This is sort of a counter-proposal to Noah's discussion of search path
> security checking in <20180805080441.gh1688...@rfd.leadboat.com>.
> (There's no technical reason we couldn't do both things, but I think
> this'd be more useful to
On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 03:00:26PM +0300, Danylo Hlynskyi wrote:
> The problem
> ==
>
> [...]
>
> We don't trust full-disk-encryption or any other transparent encryption,
> because of possible SQL injections.
Can you elaborate on this?
> Solution 1 (possibly can be used even now)
>
On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 11:47:34AM -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> Yes. Would that snprintf() and vsnprintf() were async-signal-safe --
> they can be, and some implementations probably are, but they aren't
> required to be, then making ereport() safe would be easier.
So, I took a look a
On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 07:19:34PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 20/07/18 18:03, Andres Freund wrote:
> >It's much less the exit() that's unsafe, than the callbacks themselves,
> >right? Perhaps just restate that we wouldn't want to trigger atexit
> >processing due to signal safety?
>
>
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 12:25:31PM +0200, Marco van Eck wrote:
> Indeed having unencrypted password lying (.pgpass or PGPASSWORD or -W)
> around is making my auditors unhappy, and forcing me to enter the password
> over and over again. With a simple test it seems the password entered by
> the user
On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 10:36:34AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Heikki Linnakangas (hlinn...@iki.fi) wrote:
> > Sorry if this sounds facetious, but:
> >
> > What is the point of this patch? What's the advantage of GSSAPI encryption
> > over SSL? I was hoping to find the answer by reading the
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 10:01:40AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-07-27 11:15:00 -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> > Even assuming you can't change the PG license, you could still:
> >
> > - require disclosure in contributions
>
> That really has no upsi
Even assuming you can't change the PG license, you could still:
- require disclosure in contributions
- require a wide grant in contributions
- document all such grants separately from the copyright license
Putting the grants in the license is convenient, but it's not required
to include
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 09:30:45AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> If you think that the lack of a CLA and a patent grant never causes
> extensive conversations with legal, I am quite certain that you are
> incorrect. I know of multiple instances where this has been a
> concern.
>
> Other open
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 04:42:24PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> It's barely possible that we could get current and new contributors to
> sign some kind of CLA containing anti-patent terms, but I don't think
> there's any hope of amending the distribution license.
Leaving aside whether you could
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 07:57:49PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2018-07-24 19:49:19 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> However, a singly-referenced SELECT CTE could reasonably be treated as
> >> equivalent to a sub-select-in-FROM, and then you would have the same
> >> mechanisms
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 05:08:43PM +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> Nico> It is possible to add a keyword for this purpose in the WITH syntax:
>
> Nico> WITH VIEW (...) AS a_view
>
> The existing (and standard) syntax is WITH ctename AS (query).
Oy, I flubbed that up.
> Syntaxes that have
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 11:45:58AM -0400, Chapman Flack wrote:
> On 07/25/2018 11:25 AM, Nico Williams wrote:
>
> > I don't understand why it's not obvious that one can unknowingly and
> > accidentally re-invent someone else's idea.
>
> It's perfectly obvious. It's th
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 07:42:37AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> Please find attached a version rebased atop 167075be3ab1547e18 with
> what I believe are appropriate changes to regression test output. The
> other changes to the regression tests output are somewhat puzzling, as
> they change the
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 02:48:01PM +0700, Benjamin Scherrey wrote:
> If you violate a patent, knowingly or otherwise, you are subject to
> penalties (perhaps not treble but still penalties) and will have to remove
> the offending code unless a deal is reached with the patent holder.
Unless you do
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 03:06:22AM -0400, Chapman Flack wrote:
> On 07/25/18 01:56, Nico Williams wrote:
>
> > Wrong. With patents the important thing is not to know about them when
> > you implement -- if you come up with the same idea by accident (which,
> > of cours
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 06:29:37PM -0400, Isaac Morland wrote:
> On 24 July 2018 at 18:17, Nico Williams wrote:
> > Note that it's OK to *accidentally* implement patented algorithms as
> > long as the author of the contribution didn't know about. There's no
> > trebble
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 04:28:51PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 4:26 PM, Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
> > Clean room design addresses copyright-related issues, not patents.
>
> Correct. It's important folks realise that!
Indeed.
It's also important to know, when reading PG source
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 12:12:03PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 07/23/2018 12:06 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >>So, is it FUD? The core needs paid-for legal advice, not speculation.
> >>
> >>I'm quite certain that a software license can make a patent grant to the
> >>satisfaction of many open
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 03:06:13PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 02:02:40PM -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 01:12:19PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:27:49AM -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> >
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 01:12:49PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:37:05AM -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:40:41AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Sun Microsystems seemed reasonably trustworthy too.
> >
> > Ar
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 01:12:19PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:27:49AM -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> > Perhaps patent law [in some countries] requires contracts as opposed to
> > licenses?
>
> Yes, I really don't know. I have just seen enough
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:55:01AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:40:41AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 08:19:35AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > I'm fairly sure that I'm right. But my point isn't that we should "trust
> > > Andres implicitly
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:40:41AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 08:19:35AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I'm fairly sure that I'm right. But my point isn't that we should "trust
> > Andres implicitly ™" (although that's obviously not a bad starting point
> > ;)). But
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 10:13:48AM -0400, Chapman Flack wrote:
> On 07/23/2018 10:01 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > And the larger question is whether a patent free for use by software
> > under any license can be used in a defensive way. If not, it means we
> > have no way forward here.
>
>
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 09:56:47AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 06:31:14AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > It explicitly says irrevocable and successors. Why seems squarely
> > aimed at your concern. Bankruptcy wouldn't just invalidate that.
>
> They can say whatever they
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 09:28:19AM +0200, Kaye Ann Ignacio wrote:
> I'm trying to add a foreign constraint in my local table to reference a
> column in a materialized view, is it possible to alter this materialized
> view by adding a primary key constraint?
It's not, but I'm working on a patch
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 01:46:12PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-07-19 15:42:46 -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> > Yes, but that's in libc. None of that is in the PG code itself.
>
> That's simply entirely completely wrong. PG has a good chunk of memory
> management la
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 03:42:46PM -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 01:38:52PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Uhm, this'd already require a fair bit of threadsafety. Like at least
> > all of the memory allocator / context code. Nor is having threads
> >
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 01:38:52PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-07-19 15:27:06 -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> > No, the other thread does NOT continue to do whatever -- it
> > blocks/sleeps forever waiting for the coming exit(3).
> >
> > I.e.,
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 01:35:02PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-07-19 15:17:26 -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> > You can create that thread with a really small stack given that its only
> > purpose is to do this error reporting and exit.
>
> You still have a full k
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 01:10:14PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-07-19 15:04:15 -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> > Besides making ereport() async-signal-safe, which is tricky, you could
> > write(2) the arguments to a pipe that another thread in the same process
> > is r
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 04:04:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Nico Williams writes:
> > What I'd do is have a volatile sig_atomic_t in_signal_handler_context
> > variable to indicate that we're dying, and then when that is non-zero,
> > ereport() and friends could use
On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 03:10:31PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > Or, probably more robust: Simply _exit(2) without further ado, and rely
> > on postmaster to output an appropriate error message. Arguably it's not
> > actually useful to see hundreds of "WARNING: terminating
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 03:49:35PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2018-07-19 11:57:25 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >> The regular backend's quickdie() function is more tricky. It should also
> >> call _exit(2) rather than exit(2). But it also tries to ereport a
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 12:20:53PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-07-19 11:57:25 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > Ugh. Yeah, in wal_quickdie, and other aux process *_quickdie() handlers, I
> > agree we should just _exit(2). All we want to do is to exit the process
> > immediately.
>
>
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 09:33:21AM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 12 July 2018 at 09:10, Tsunakawa, Takayuki <
> tsunakawa.ta...@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > From: Nico Williams [mailto:n...@cryptonector.com]
> > > On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 12:29:12AM +, Tsunakawa, Taka
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 01:10:33AM +, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> From: Nico Williams [mailto:n...@cryptonector.com]
> > On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 12:29:12AM +, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> > > How can one make defensive use of his patent if he allows everyone to
> &g
Attached is an additional patch, as well as a new, rebased patch.
This includes changes responsive to Álvaro Herrera's commentary about
the SET CONSTRAINTS manual page.
Nico
--
>From e7838b60dbf0a8cd7f35591db2f9aab78d8903cb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nicolas Williams
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 12:29:12AM +, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> From: Nico Williams [mailto:n...@cryptonector.com]
> > My advice is to write up a patent grant that allows all to use the
> > relevant patents royalty-free with a no-lawsuit covenant. I.e., make
> > only
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 03:13:30PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2018-Jun-06, Nico Williams wrote:
> > I've finally gotten around to rebasing this patch and making the change
> > that was requested, which was: merge the now-would-be-three deferral-
> > related bo
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 04:54:13PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> Nico Williams writes:
>
> > [Re-send; first attempt appears to have hit /dev/null somewhere. My
> > apologies if you get two copies.]
> >
> > I've finally gotten around to rebasing th
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 01:03:44AM +, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> > The core team has considered this matter, and has concluded that it's
> > time to establish a firm project policy that we will not accept any code
> > that is known to be
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 09:47:09AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> The core team has considered this matter, and has concluded that it's
> time to establish a firm project policy that we will not accept any code
> that is known to be patent-encumbered. The long-term legal risks and
> complications
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 08:20:53AM +, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> From: Nico Williams [mailto:n...@cryptonector.com]
> > On Sat, Jul 07, 2018 at 10:20:35AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > It's entirely possible to dual license contributions and everything. Why
&g
On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 08:29:08AM +, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> > There are arguments made that TPL (and BSD, MIT etc) already includes an
> > implicit patent grant, but while a longstanding theory, it's to my
> > knowledge not legally been tested.
>
> When we find a reasonable consensus
On Sat, Jul 07, 2018 at 10:20:35AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> It's entirely possible to dual license contributions and everything. Why
> are you making such aggressive statements about a, so far, apparently
> good faith engagement?
One problem is that many contributors would not want to be
On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 01:15:15AM +, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> From: Craig Ringer [mailto:cr...@2ndquadrant.com]
> > I'm assuming you don't want to offer a grant that lets anyone use them for
> > anything. But if you have a really broad grant to PostgreSQL, all someone
> > would have to do
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 07:28:42PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 7:16 AM, Nico Williams wrote:
> > Yes, but piecemeal encryption seems like a bad idea to me.
>
> What do you mean by "piecemeal encryption"? Is it not-whole database
> encrypt
On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 06:22:46PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 2:31 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
> wrote:
> > From: Nico Williams [mailto:n...@cryptonector.com]
> >
> >> One shortcoming of relying on OS functionality for protection aga
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 04:54:13PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> Nico Williams writes:
>
> > [Re-send; first attempt appears to have hit /dev/null somewhere. My
> > apologies if you get two copies.]
> >
> > I've finally gotten around to rebasing th
On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 06:56:34PM +0300, Alvaro Hernandez wrote:
> On 21/06/18 21:43, Nico Williams wrote:
> >Incidentally, PG w/ pgcrypto and FDW does provide everything one needs
> >to be able to implement client-side crypto:
> >
> > - use PG w/ FDW as a client
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 09:36:52PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 26 February 2018 at 04:05, Anthony Communier > wrote:
> > It would be nice if application connected to a Postrgesql database could
> > send and receive JSONB in binary. It could save some useless text
> > conversion. All works
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 05:31:44AM +, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> From: Nico Williams [mailto:n...@cryptonector.com]
> > Let's start with a set of threat models then. I'll go first:
>
> Thank you so much for summarizing the current situation. I'd
> appreciate it
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 10:18:12AM +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> On 22.06.2018 00:34, Nico Williams wrote:
> >So I think you just have to have lengths.
> >
> >Now, this being about compression, I understand that you might now want
> >to have 4-byte lengths,
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 07:46:35PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Agreed. I can see from this discussion that we have a long way to go
> before we can produce something clearly useful, but it will be worth it.
Let's start with a set of threat models then. I'll go first:
1) storage devices as
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 10:12:17AM +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> On 20.06.2018 23:34, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> >Konstantin Knizhnik writes:
> >Well, that's a design decision you've made. You could put lengths on
> >chunks that are sent out - then you'd know exactly how much is needed.
>
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 08:41:46PM +0900, Moon, Insung wrote:
> Issues on data encryption of PostgreSQL
> ==
> Currently, in PostgreSQL, data encryption can be using pgcrypto Tool.
> However, it is inconvenient to use pgcrypto to encrypts data in some cases.
>
> There are two significant
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 10:14:54AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 04:57:18PM -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> > Client-side crypto is hard to do well and still get decent performance.
> > So on the whole I think that crypto is a poor fit for the DBAs-are-the-
&g
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 10:05:41AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 6:57 AM, Nico Williams wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 05:16:46PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 12:29:57PM -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> >> > N
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 06:19:40PM -0400, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 06/20/2018 05:12 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 11:06:20AM -0400, Joe Conway wrote:
> > Even if they are encrypted with the same key, they use different
> > initialization vectors that are stored inside the
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 06:06:56PM -0400, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 06/20/2018 05:09 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 09:49:20AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> know the ordering of the values under whatever ordering semantics
> >> apply to that index. It's unclear to me how
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 05:16:46PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 12:29:57PM -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> > Note that unless the pg_catalog is protected against manipulation by
> > remote storage, then TDE for user tables might be possible to
> >
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 08:46:06AM +0100, Dent John wrote:
> I’m pretty impressed anything in this space can be written entirely in
> PlPGQSL!
https://github.com/twosigma/postgresql-contrib
PG is quite powerful!
I have even implemented a COMMIT TRIGGER in pure PlPgSQL.
You'll notice I make
On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 07:38:13PM +0100, Dent John wrote:
> I commented to Corey (privately) that, while my rewrite extension has
> gotten me a server that responds quickly to aggregate queries, the
> constant need to refresh the supporting MVs means the system’s load
> average is constant and
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 06:22:22PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> As per discussion at PGCon unconference, I think that firstly we need
> to discuss what threats we want to defend database data against. If
We call that a threat model. There can be many threat models, of
course.
> user wants to
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 02:20:21AM +, Ideriha, Takeshi wrote:
> >From: Nico Williams [mailto:n...@cryptonector.com]
> >On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 09:05:23AM +, Ideriha, Takeshi wrote:
> >> Only the difference of data can be restored.
> >
> >But that's
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 12:36:01PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> Nico Williams writes:
> > On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 04:11:10PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> >> Nico was kind enough to provide me with some code review. This should
> >> those concerns (clarify short-rea
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
